Creator
Nicola
Created
Jul 7, 2022 1:25 PM
Stage
Graduated from Notebook
Goals:
- Privacy of what content
- Privacy of who is storing it
Approach 1: Clear text setting
- Setup: Indexer has in clear text all the map(content → sp)
- Client requests in an oblivious way the key(content) value(sps) that they are interest in
Approach 2: Encrypted text setting
- Setup: SP sends an encrypted list of content to the indexer. (indexer doesn’t know what content the SP is storing)
- (somehow) Indexer has many encrypted lists (in a way that query in these list)
- Client request a search in all the sp indeces
Binary search through obfuscation | |
Strategy | Problem |
Searchable Encryption | all index must be encrypted for the user |
Search through FHE | all index must be encrypted for the user |
PIR | |
PSI with tags/labels | |
Oblivious key-value retrieval | |
Question:
- Can we have multiple indexers and assuming that they are not colluding? (This is important for PIR)
Additional resources:
- A similar setting: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.14645.pdf
- On FHE emulating PIR through "projection functions". See, e.g., page 10 here (“f_proj”):
- https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/638.pdf
- I.e.:
- makes ct <- Enc_pk(i) Sends ct to Server
- Server: ct_response <- FHE.Eval(pk, f_ proj, ct) where f_proj_D(i) -> D_i D1, … D_N is DB
- more on PIR in general:
- Recent PIR paper with amortized efficiency:
Client(i)
Strategy:
- Leak no info requires the indexer reading the entire database